Get Agent ROI

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true. The description adds value by detailing the output structure (costs, outcomes, breakdown), but does not reveal additional behavioral traits beyond what annotations imply. No contradiction.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two sentences: first declares purpose, second lists output and exclusion. Front-loaded, no extraneous words, every sentence earns its place.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool's simplicity, rich annotations, and no output schema, the description covers purpose, usage guidelines, and high-level output. Slightly incomplete on return format, but sufficient for an experienced user.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema has 100% description coverage, so baseline is 3. The description does not add extra meaning to parameters beyond the schema; it focuses on output rather than parameter details.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool calculates ROI for an agent, listing specific metrics (costs, outcomes, multiplier, breakdown) and explicitly distinguishes from the sibling tool generate_roi_audit for fleet-wide analysis.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Provides clear when-to-use ('calculating ROI for an agent') and when-not-to-use ('Do NOT use for fleet-wide ROI'), with a direct sibling reference. Also notes usefulness for identifying high-value agents.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.